Considering spec reel with DVX100 and PS+Technik

Mizell Wilson · January 20th, 2004, 01:33 PM

Peter,

It's 950/rental day.

Let's say, for example, that you were going to check out Feb 9th and return the equipment Feb 18th. Theoretically you would only be charged for 4-5 days. If you returned the morning of the 23rd, you would only be charged 6 rental days.

$950 x 5 rental days = $4,750

$950 x 6 rental days = $5,700

Another thing to consider is that most rental houses do 1 day weekends i.e. if you check out Friday and return the equipment Monday morning you are only charged for 1 rental day.

so to expand the equation: 1day/wkend, 3day/wk, 10day/mth

Anyone reading please remember that I do not represent a rental house and any of this is up to negotiation between the given rental house and the client.

Both TCS and Hand Held in NY have the Mini35 for the DVX100. I know Hand Held's is about to go out on a four week job, but they are considering a second unit to cover that.

mizell

David Ziegelheim · January 20th, 2004, 01:39 PM

It is really aesthetics...however...

The Mini35 provides the DOF. The SDX provides the rest. Rentals are not that different. The SD and 35mm zooms are about the same. The 35mm primes are cheaper. The Mini35 rents for only a little less than the SDX. They needs similar lens accessories and I believe tripods.

So the comparison is, I think, valid. Aesthetically, for the same cost, which is the better solution for which circumstance?

Peter Richardson · January 20th, 2004, 01:46 PM

Thanks Mizell.

Mizell Wilson · January 20th, 2004, 02:03 PM

David,

Didn't think the comparison wasn't valid.

If we say that you can achieve the same aesthetic with either the Mini35/DVX100 or the PRO35/SDX900 then the decision does come down to technical, as well as logistical and monetary, considerations.

Similarly equipped to the TCS Mini35/DVX100 package, the PRO35/SDX900 package would rent for $1,600, or roughly the cost of a Super16 setup. For a weekend shoot there's a lot to be said that that is not the biggest of differences and why not shoot 2/3". If we look at a month long shoot, that's another $16,000 you have to come up with.

There is also an issue with the acceptance of DVCPRO50. It's a great format, but is not well implemented at all in the major markets, and even less so in the ancillary markets. Unless you pop for the cash on a Panasonic deck of your own to do conversions, you could be stuck with no way to distribute you project or properly post it without going out of market.

MiniDv on the other hand is fully supported and is something they can digitize and edit with relative ease.

Another issue is that of size. While making the DVX100 bigger, the Mini35/DVX100 combo is still smaller then the PRO35/SDX900 combo. I joined a production recently on their test shoots/locations scouts and they were still able to get away with stealing locations because the cam did not look like any recognized professional camera. If a security guard took notice they would immediately start doing tourist poses and waves and the rig was dismissed as some fancy hobbyist rig. The SDX900 on the other hand conforms to the standard form factor seen throughout the broadcast industry for decades and is instantly recognized as something that prolly requires a shooting permit.

mizell

David Ziegelheim · January 20th, 2004, 02:41 PM

What I was saying is the rental on a SDX900 with SD zoom is about the same as the Mini35 with 35mm zoom. Or are my numbers wrong?

P.S.
In some jurisdictions I understand they confiscate your equipment when shooting without a permit. IMHO, it is not worth the risk.

Mizell Wilson · January 20th, 2004, 02:48 PM

The SDX900 w/ zoom is prolly about the price of the Mini35/DVX100 rig and while you might get the better quality image technically, you will receive a more aesthetically pleasing image from the Mini35/DVX100. The SDX900 approximates Super16 which does not have the shallow DoF properties that 35mm does.

mizell

Othello Khanh · January 21st, 2004, 01:44 AM

I'm still trying to get info about using the mini35 with dvxa in squeeze mode.
As this mode will capture 33% more image horizontally, will we get vignetting on the edges?
Anybody with an answer will be welcome.
Happy new year of the monkey!

Mizell Wilson · January 21st, 2004, 09:52 AM

Othello,

The reports I have so far is that there is no vignetting issue.

People don't seem particularly happy with the squeeze mode on it's own either. It works for the most part but there are reports that it still doesn't use the whole chip as promised and since it is an electronic approximation, they feel that there is no significant increase in resolution. These are just preliminary anecdotal reports, but it's what I have to pass along at the moment.

anyone else?

Othello Khanh · January 22nd, 2004, 01:52 AM

Mizell,
I suppose you are right.
I remember downloading files from this forum where we can see that it seems the squeeze is a letterbox expandended vertically.
Therefore , no more resolution , is that right?
But still, isn't it the only solution to shoot 16:9 with the mini 35 ?
Still the same question, I know, but I like this solution better thant putting anamophing lenses in front of prime, in front of mini35, in front of dvx100(a).
Right?

Barry Green · January 22nd, 2004, 12:02 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by Othello Khanh :
As this mode will capture 33% more image horizontally, will we get vignetting on the edges?
-->>>

It does not capture more image horizontally. There will be no vignetting.

Squeeze mode is electronically-stretched letterbox footage. It's the same horizontal field of view as the 4:3 footage.

Othello Khanh · January 22nd, 2004, 11:11 PM

Thanks Barry,
I think I finally got the picture.
That's why people didn't seem to be recomending squeeze mode.
So now I wonder if getting the dvx a is the right solution.
Paying the extra for advanced mode, still having to use the glass adaptor and still not being able to use the mini 35...
Humm... Need a thought before investing in mini 35 and new dvx100a...

Barry Green · January 23rd, 2004, 08:57 PM

Keep in mind that "squeeze mode" is still capable of delivering much higher resolution on the DVX than any other interlaced camera can deliver. A DVX in "squeeze mode", shooting progressive with thin line detail, will give you about 360 lines of resolution -- as much as you'd get from a Sony PD150 with an anamorphic adapter attached!

So if you use the mini35 with the DVX100 or DVX100A, either in "letterbox" or "squeeze" mode, you'll be getting about 360 lines of resolution. If you choose to add an anamorphic adapter in front of the mini35 lens, you'll get the full 480 lines of the chip -- but at the addition of another piece of glass in front of your lens.

I just got my film print back from the lab, and it has some DVX/mini35/letterbox footage on it. Once I have a chance to screen it, I'll let you know how it looks. The other footage on the reel is from the DVX with anamorphic adapter so we'll see each system back-to-back.

Othello Khanh · January 24th, 2004, 05:41 AM

Dear Guru - Barry,
I't's me again.
Can't wait to know about your blow up to 35mm tests.
I Plan to shoot feature with 2 dvx.
Already own a dvx100 and was planning to get an other dvxA to use squeeze and mini 35.
Cam a: dvxa w/ mini 35 and squeeze
cam b: good ol dvx with extra lenses and/or pany 16/9 adapt.
If squeeze is good enough for cam a, I just crop cam b with extra lenses (as cannot use pany 16/9 together with extra lenses (i.e century optic or pany)
This makes sense.
Hope to have news soon, and make my day.
Happy chinese new year from Saigon.

January 20th, 2004, 01:33 PM	#16
Mizell Wilson Sales: Reflecmedia Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Linden, NJ Posts: 147	Peter, It's 950/rental day. Let's say, for example, that you were going to check out Feb 9th and return the equipment Feb 18th. Theoretically you would only be charged for 4-5 days. If you returned the morning of the 23rd, you would only be charged 6 rental days. $950 x 5 rental days = $4,750 $950 x 6 rental days = $5,700 Another thing to consider is that most rental houses do 1 day weekends i.e. if you check out Friday and return the equipment Monday morning you are only charged for 1 rental day. so to expand the equation: 1day/wkend, 3day/wk, 10day/mth Anyone reading please remember that I do not represent a rental house and any of this is up to negotiation between the given rental house and the client. Both TCS and Hand Held in NY have the Mini35 for the DVX100. I know Hand Held's is about to go out on a four week job, but they are considering a second unit to cover that. mizell __________________ Posts before Feb 2004 were on behalf of ZGC, afterwards they're all mine!

January 20th, 2004, 02:03 PM	#19
Mizell Wilson Sales: Reflecmedia Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Linden, NJ Posts: 147	David, Didn't think the comparison wasn't valid. If we say that you can achieve the same aesthetic with either the Mini35/DVX100 or the PRO35/SDX900 then the decision does come down to technical, as well as logistical and monetary, considerations. Similarly equipped to the TCS Mini35/DVX100 package, the PRO35/SDX900 package would rent for $1,600, or roughly the cost of a Super16 setup. For a weekend shoot there's a lot to be said that that is not the biggest of differences and why not shoot 2/3". If we look at a month long shoot, that's another $16,000 you have to come up with. There is also an issue with the acceptance of DVCPRO50. It's a great format, but is not well implemented at all in the major markets, and even less so in the ancillary markets. Unless you pop for the cash on a Panasonic deck of your own to do conversions, you could be stuck with no way to distribute you project or properly post it without going out of market. MiniDv on the other hand is fully supported and is something they can digitize and edit with relative ease. Another issue is that of size. While making the DVX100 bigger, the Mini35/DVX100 combo is still smaller then the PRO35/SDX900 combo. I joined a production recently on their test shoots/locations scouts and they were still able to get away with stealing locations because the cam did not look like any recognized professional camera. If a security guard took notice they would immediately start doing tourist poses and waves and the rig was dismissed as some fancy hobbyist rig. The SDX900 on the other hand conforms to the standard form factor seen throughout the broadcast industry for decades and is instantly recognized as something that prolly requires a shooting permit. mizell __________________ Posts before Feb 2004 were on behalf of ZGC, afterwards they're all mine!

January 20th, 2004, 02:48 PM	#21
Mizell Wilson Sales: Reflecmedia Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Linden, NJ Posts: 147	The SDX900 w/ zoom is prolly about the price of the Mini35/DVX100 rig and while you might get the better quality image technically, you will receive a more aesthetically pleasing image from the Mini35/DVX100. The SDX900 approximates Super16 which does not have the shallow DoF properties that 35mm does. mizell __________________ Posts before Feb 2004 were on behalf of ZGC, afterwards they're all mine!

January 21st, 2004, 09:52 AM	#23
Mizell Wilson Sales: Reflecmedia Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Linden, NJ Posts: 147	Othello, The reports I have so far is that there is no vignetting issue. People don't seem particularly happy with the squeeze mode on it's own either. It works for the most part but there are reports that it still doesn't use the whole chip as promised and since it is an electronic approximation, they feel that there is no significant increase in resolution. These are just preliminary anecdotal reports, but it's what I have to pass along at the moment. anyone else? __________________ Posts before Feb 2004 were on behalf of ZGC, afterwards they're all mine!

January 20th, 2004, 01:39 PM	#17
David Ziegelheim Major Player Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Warren, NJ Posts: 398	It is really aesthetics...however... The Mini35 provides the DOF. The SDX provides the rest. Rentals are not that different. The SD and 35mm zooms are about the same. The 35mm primes are cheaper. The Mini35 rents for only a little less than the SDX. They needs similar lens accessories and I believe tripods. So the comparison is, I think, valid. Aesthetically, for the same cost, which is the better solution for which circumstance?

January 20th, 2004, 01:46 PM	#18
Peter Richardson Major Player Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Portland, Oregon Posts: 608	Thanks Mizell.

January 20th, 2004, 02:41 PM	#20
David Ziegelheim Major Player Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Warren, NJ Posts: 398	What I was saying is the rental on a SDX900 with SD zoom is about the same as the Mini35 with 35mm zoom. Or are my numbers wrong? P.S. In some jurisdictions I understand they confiscate your equipment when shooting without a permit. IMHO, it is not worth the risk.

January 21st, 2004, 01:44 AM	#22
Othello Khanh New Boot Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: HCMC - Vietnam Posts: 7	I'm still trying to get info about using the mini35 with dvxa in squeeze mode. As this mode will capture 33% more image horizontally, will we get vignetting on the edges? Anybody with an answer will be welcome. Happy new year of the monkey!

January 22nd, 2004, 01:52 AM	#24
Othello Khanh New Boot Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: HCMC - Vietnam Posts: 7	Mizell, I suppose you are right. I remember downloading files from this forum where we can see that it seems the squeeze is a letterbox expandended vertically. Therefore , no more resolution , is that right? But still, isn't it the only solution to shoot 16:9 with the mini 35 ? Still the same question, I know, but I like this solution better thant putting anamophing lenses in front of prime, in front of mini35, in front of dvx100(a). Right?

January 22nd, 2004, 12:02 PM	#25
Barry Green Barry Wan Kenobi Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: North Carolina Posts: 3,863	<<<-- Originally posted by Othello Khanh : As this mode will capture 33% more image horizontally, will we get vignetting on the edges? -->>> It does not capture more image horizontally. There will be no vignetting. Squeeze mode is electronically-stretched letterbox footage. It's the same horizontal field of view as the 4:3 footage.

January 22nd, 2004, 11:11 PM	#26
Othello Khanh New Boot Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: HCMC - Vietnam Posts: 7	Thanks Barry, I think I finally got the picture. That's why people didn't seem to be recomending squeeze mode. So now I wonder if getting the dvx a is the right solution. Paying the extra for advanced mode, still having to use the glass adaptor and still not being able to use the mini 35... Humm... Need a thought before investing in mini 35 and new dvx100a...

January 23rd, 2004, 08:57 PM	#27
Barry Green Barry Wan Kenobi Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: North Carolina Posts: 3,863	Keep in mind that "squeeze mode" is still capable of delivering much higher resolution on the DVX than any other interlaced camera can deliver. A DVX in "squeeze mode", shooting progressive with thin line detail, will give you about 360 lines of resolution -- as much as you'd get from a Sony PD150 with an anamorphic adapter attached! So if you use the mini35 with the DVX100 or DVX100A, either in "letterbox" or "squeeze" mode, you'll be getting about 360 lines of resolution. If you choose to add an anamorphic adapter in front of the mini35 lens, you'll get the full 480 lines of the chip -- but at the addition of another piece of glass in front of your lens. I just got my film print back from the lab, and it has some DVX/mini35/letterbox footage on it. Once I have a chance to screen it, I'll let you know how it looks. The other footage on the reel is from the DVX with anamorphic adapter so we'll see each system back-to-back.

January 24th, 2004, 05:41 AM	#28
Othello Khanh New Boot Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: HCMC - Vietnam Posts: 7	Dear Guru - Barry, I't's me again. Can't wait to know about your blow up to 35mm tests. I Plan to shoot feature with 2 dvx. Already own a dvx100 and was planning to get an other dvxA to use squeeze and mini 35. Cam a: dvxa w/ mini 35 and squeeze cam b: good ol dvx with extra lenses and/or pany 16/9 adapt. If squeeze is good enough for cam a, I just crop cam b with extra lenses (as cannot use pany 16/9 together with extra lenses (i.e century optic or pany) This makes sense. Hope to have news soon, and make my day. Happy chinese new year from Saigon.